Reg Boyle wrote:
> ><< For a male soprano to advertise himself as a tenor suggests to me
> > a conscious or subconscious desire to delude the public.
> > It also, is called dishonesty. Reg. >>
and
> My objection on behalf of any casual opera goer was to the
> poaching of the name TENOR as a means of remedying that
> lamentation.
Poaching? You amaze me, Reg. I'm sure you know more music history than
that. In renaissance music the tenor ("holder") was the voice which was
singing the cantus firmus, the plainsong melody, often in long notes; it
didn't designate any particular range. The expression "contra-tenor"
dates from the same period, and was often at roughly the same pitch.
Counter-tenor singing the counter-melody. Sometimes it was higher,
sometimes it was lower. I think one of the main reasons Alfred Deller
and others started using the expression was to avoid any ambiguity.
Contraltos were and are still often called altos.
Now, if you want to take issue with the naming of a voice, why not pick
on us contraltos? Are we altos, that is high voices? Or the opposite of
altos? What on earth would _that_ mean? And do you think a mezzo-soprano
is dishonestly advertising herself as a soprano, which expression they
have likewise "poached"?
Why do I think you are being just a little mischievous, Reg? ;o)
cheers
Linda
|
